Pet Lovers Make Lousy Human Beings

 

“The more I learn about people, the more I like my dog.” — Mark Twain.


From the NYPost: Humans love dogs more than other people: study.

Two major studies showed that mankind has more empathy for pooches in dire circumstances than suffering people, according to a report in the Times of London.

A UK medical research charity staged two phony donation campaigns — one for a dog and the other featuring a man. Of course, the pooch drew more contributions.

“Would you give 5 pounds to save Harrison from a slow, painful death?” the separate ads said, featuring a canine and human “Harrison.”

Then a Northeastern University study showed that only a baby human could compete with man’s best friend.

Students were shown fake newspaper clippings about a baseball-bat attack on a puppy, an adult dog, a year-old infant and a 30-year-old adult. They were asked questions to gauge their empathy and the adult finished last in sympathy.

“Respondents were significantly less distressed when adult humans were victimized, in comparison with human babies, puppies and adult dogs,” according to Northeastern researchers. “Only relative to the infant victim did the adult dog receive lower scores of empathy.”

I’ve heard similar sentiments from talk radio listeners and alleged conservatives for years. And as everyone who listened to my rant on today’s podcast knows, I find this sentiment horrifying.

Look, I’m more misanthropic than the average person, and I get Mark Twain’s point–just as I laugh at the great line about W.C. Fields: “Anyone who hates dogs and babies can’t be all bad.”

But if, in fact, you really do hate dogs and babies, there’s something wrong with you. And if you really would give your last $5 to alleviate the suffering of an animal and leave one of your fellow human beings in pain…you are a lousy “fellow human being.”

There’s a name for people who can’t tell the difference between animals and humans: “Children.” (Or sociopaths. But I repeat myself.) Children think that doggies can talk and kitties like to watch TV when the people aren’t home.

Grown-ups understand that animals are just animals. The idiotic comment I’ve heard a million times about how “animals are innocent, while people are evil” is an embarrassingly juvenile argument. Animals aren’t evil or good, because animals can’t make moral judgments. They don’t make decisions. They live on instinct and training.  Humans are human because we can make choices, we can choose self-sacrifice, we can show compassion to, among other things, dumb animals.

No, your pet is not your child. No, your dog is not your “fur baby.” No, your cat cannot say “Mama.” (I actually had this argument with a grown woman in Charleston, SC)  No, no, no.

If this were an isolated trend, I’d shrug and move on.  But it’s not. It’s part of an overall movement towards a more juvenile society. When 20-something men and women use the verb “adulting” to talk about the (formerly) everyday behavior of 20-somethings, there’s a problem. When a record number of 18-35 year olds are still living with mom and dad, that’s a problem. And when apparent adults have the same attitudes about animals as the target audience of animated Disney movies…

There is nothing wrong with loving people more than animals. There is something wrong with loving animals more than people. The fact that I have to type that sentence is frightening.

Published in Culture
Tags: ,

Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 32 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Von Snrub Inactive
    Von Snrub
    @VonSnrub

    Michael Graham (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):
    Michael, I’m not going to read all the comments but I love your podcasts, except these anti-dog tirades. You’re the one who sounds like a psychopath when you go on them. Dogs are innocent, loving, and relatively helpless. It’s entirely normal that we respond with empathy to such a creature in distress. And a couple of silly “studies” posing utterly unrealistic Sophie’s Choices between saving a puppy being tortured and saving a baby being tortured, or whatever, don’t produce meaningful information. The only thing I hear when you go on these tirades is that the suffering puppy doesn’t move you. In a word, yuck.

    By the way, yes, I said “loving.” I don’t mean to suggest that canine emotions map exactly to human ones. No doubt they don’t. But anybody who claims that dogs are emotionless automatons whose actions are driven by nothing but an instinct for food and sex (your words on the podcast) has obviously never lived with one.

    There is nothing “anti-dog” about understanding that they’re just animals and human lives are more precious. There’s nothing “anti-dog” about biology, and dogs do not “love” anymore than dogs “hate” or “covet” or “seek revenge.” Dogs are great. They’re fun. I’m sitting next to little Hans Blix (shih tzu/cav spaniel mix) right now.

    But he’s a dog, and every time he licks his [redacted], he reminds me of that fact.

    Godwin here,

    Your driving down the road and out jumps time traveling baby Hitler to the left and your neighbor’s dog sparky to the right. I’m gonna go hit baby Hitler.

    While human life in its absolute is more precious/valuable than a dog, a human has a much higher capacity to be come less and less precious overtime.

    Additionally, you can look it up, but when you look into a dogs eyes your brain reacts as if you’re looking at your own infant. Dogs are animals, but they’re also drugs, happy drugs.

    Come on there’s a higherarchy

    Children –> immeadiate family –> friends –> your dog –> general strangers –> other dogs –> the homeless

    • #31
  2. Von Snrub Inactive
    Von Snrub
    @VonSnrub

    Michael Graham (View Comment):

    Cato Rand (View Comment):
    Michael, I’m not going to read all the comments but I love your podcasts, except these anti-dog tirades. You’re the one who sounds like a psychopath when you go on them. Dogs are innocent, loving, and relatively helpless. It’s entirely normal that we respond with empathy to such a creature in distress. And a couple of silly “studies” posing utterly unrealistic Sophie’s Choices between saving a puppy being tortured and saving a baby being tortured, or whatever, don’t produce meaningful information. The only thing I hear when you go on these tirades is that the suffering puppy doesn’t move you. In a word, yuck.

    By the way, yes, I said “loving.” I don’t mean to suggest that canine emotions map exactly to human ones. No doubt they don’t. But anybody who claims that dogs are emotionless automatons whose actions are driven by nothing but an instinct for food and sex (your words on the podcast) has obviously never lived with one.

    There is nothing “anti-dog” about understanding that they’re just animals and human lives are more precious. There’s nothing “anti-dog” about biology, and dogs do not “love” anymore than dogs “hate” or “covet” or “seek revenge.” Dogs are great. They’re fun. I’m sitting next to little Hans Blix (shih tzu/cav spaniel mix) right now.

    But he’s a dog, and every time he licks his [redacted], he reminds me of that fact.

    Godwin here,

    Your driving down the road and out jumps time traveling baby Hitler to the left and your neighbor’s dog sparky to the right. I’m gonna go hit baby Hitler.

    While human life in its absolute is more precious/valuable than a dog, a human has a much higher capacity to be come less and less precious overtime.

    Additionally, you can look it up, but when you look into a dogs eyes your brain reacts as if you’re looking at your own infant. Dogs are animals, but they’re also drugs, happy drugs.

    Come on there’s a higherarchy

    Children –> immediate family –> friends –> your dog –> general strangers –> other dogs –> the homeless

    • #32
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.